What do you think?
Rate this book
Not My Type: Automating Sexual Racism in Online Dating
In the world of online dating, race-based discrimination is not only tolerated, but encouraged as part of a pervasive belief that it is simply a neutral, personal choice about one's romantic partner. Indeed, it is so much a part of our inherited wisdom about dating and romance that it actually directs the algorithmic infrastructures of most major online dating platforms, such that they openly reproduce racist and sexist hierarchies. In Not My Automating Sexual Racism in Online Dating , Apryl Williams presents a socio-technical exploration of dating platforms' algorithms, their lack of transparency, the legal and ethical discourse in these companies' community guidelines, and accounts from individual users in order to argue that sexual racism is a central feature of today's online dating culture. She discusses this reality in the context of facial recognition and sorting software as well as user experiences, drawing parallels to the long history of eugenics and banned interracial partnerships. Ultimately, Williams calls for, both a reconceptualization of the technology and policies that govern dating agencies, and also a reexamination of sociocultural beliefs about attraction, beauty, and desirability.
268 pages, Hardcover
Published February 6, 2024
6 people are currently reading
142 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
June 16, 2024
Expertly researched and timely book exposing the racist algorithmic bias of online dating. Fluidly written for an a academic book, though the best parts were the interviewees and I wish more argument had been framed around their experiences.
November 30, 2025
Wow.
Apryl Williams did a magnificent job describing how dating algorithms work, and how it assigns meaning to us based on our race, gender and income.
She highlights how these apps fail to install proper safety measures for harassment, and why. “If dating platforms cannot protect White women, their prime demographic, then how can we expect them to protect the rest of us“
Sexual racism has existed before the advent of dating apps and social media, yet it is astonishing how tech is not only used to reproduce these harms to BiPoc, but also encouraged by some of these companies.
Instead of protecting its marginalised users Match Group (parent company of Tinder and Hinge) offers them new platforms disguised as “safe spaces”. Match Group has a Muslim dating app, app for just Latinos etc.
With the veil between online activities and real life thinning, we see how these ( e.g.), this book shows how algorithms have infiltrated even the most intimate corners of our lives : dating and romance.
With Tech Broligarchs shaping public sentiments, discourse and politics, we see how algorithms are materialising themselves offline. Facebook’s grip on Boomers and Gen X, Elon Musk and Sam Altman with OpenAi.
The nature of online discourse becoming online discourse can be viewed best in reality shows like “Love Island” and “Love is Blind”, where contestants of colour are either assumed or viewed as less desirable.
In the case of “ Love is Blind” one can see after the contestants have revealed themselves how white contestants do sexual racist actions or even in intraracial relationship some of the women aren’t safe (Shake and Dipti or AD and Clay)
It’s an excellent read. Insightful and well-crafted.
Apryl Williams did a magnificent job describing how dating algorithms work, and how it assigns meaning to us based on our race, gender and income.
She highlights how these apps fail to install proper safety measures for harassment, and why. “If dating platforms cannot protect White women, their prime demographic, then how can we expect them to protect the rest of us“
Sexual racism has existed before the advent of dating apps and social media, yet it is astonishing how tech is not only used to reproduce these harms to BiPoc, but also encouraged by some of these companies.
Instead of protecting its marginalised users Match Group (parent company of Tinder and Hinge) offers them new platforms disguised as “safe spaces”. Match Group has a Muslim dating app, app for just Latinos etc.
With the veil between online activities and real life thinning, we see how these ( e.g.), this book shows how algorithms have infiltrated even the most intimate corners of our lives : dating and romance.
With Tech Broligarchs shaping public sentiments, discourse and politics, we see how algorithms are materialising themselves offline. Facebook’s grip on Boomers and Gen X, Elon Musk and Sam Altman with OpenAi.
The nature of online discourse becoming online discourse can be viewed best in reality shows like “Love Island” and “Love is Blind”, where contestants of colour are either assumed or viewed as less desirable.
In the case of “ Love is Blind” one can see after the contestants have revealed themselves how white contestants do sexual racist actions or even in intraracial relationship some of the women aren’t safe (Shake and Dipti or AD and Clay)
It’s an excellent read. Insightful and well-crafted.
May 10, 2025
this is a very well researched book, and honestly don’t believe the timing could be better.
personally, as a young poc who has only found partners through dating apps, the conversations i’ve had with friends is fairly validated by this. this is especially interesting as i believe a large amount of gen-z daters are openly (or at least loudly) moving away from dating apps together, recognizing at least some inconsistency between their experiences and what these companies are saying.
academically, this book is fairly tricky to produce and yet very critical. dating apps have become commonplace to romantic relationships, and feel like an under-researched aspect of social research. i think my personal gripe is that author relies heavily on external sources and existing research (which is good and supports their arguments, but also feels like they need to find additional sources to support their arguments especially about racism). also, not the author’s fault, but it’s disappointing that these companies are very restrictive of their algorithms and scoring criteria because i would really like to dissect that. BUT, the most important and fascinating aspects of this book are the interviews, revealing people’s experiences and suggestions.
but regardless, highlighting how these dating companies work, use our data and perpetuate sexual racism is critical research. would love to see more from this author specifically highlighting queer dating (was mentioned by kind of disappointing it wasn’t a bigger point), and lack of safety initiatives by these apps.
personally, as a young poc who has only found partners through dating apps, the conversations i’ve had with friends is fairly validated by this. this is especially interesting as i believe a large amount of gen-z daters are openly (or at least loudly) moving away from dating apps together, recognizing at least some inconsistency between their experiences and what these companies are saying.
academically, this book is fairly tricky to produce and yet very critical. dating apps have become commonplace to romantic relationships, and feel like an under-researched aspect of social research. i think my personal gripe is that author relies heavily on external sources and existing research (which is good and supports their arguments, but also feels like they need to find additional sources to support their arguments especially about racism). also, not the author’s fault, but it’s disappointing that these companies are very restrictive of their algorithms and scoring criteria because i would really like to dissect that. BUT, the most important and fascinating aspects of this book are the interviews, revealing people’s experiences and suggestions.
but regardless, highlighting how these dating companies work, use our data and perpetuate sexual racism is critical research. would love to see more from this author specifically highlighting queer dating (was mentioned by kind of disappointing it wasn’t a bigger point), and lack of safety initiatives by these apps.
January 16, 2025
read for a class.
Book started off well and then took a nosedive partway through chapter 5. Some things from the notes I took while reading it as this book was my turn to lead the class discussion on the book.
The implicit reader is rather unclear to me. Chapter 3 states that it is for the "white people", but there is never another mention of who the intended audience is. Also according to chapter 3, the other chapters are supposedly "primarily for people of color" yet this is only mentioned in the same frame as the chapter that states itself for a white reader. There is also an apparent shift in the final chapter and conclusion to instead center the corporate diversifier(tm) and hr person with things that are both palatable and actionable on the behalf of the dating app companies.
There are numerous times where even in William’s book that the language of science/ optimization appear. The same goes for language anti-black rhetoric that positions blackness/ darkness with abjection (“This artful myth conceals the darker truth that dating platforms play matchmaker with a faulty set of White supremacist assumptions about attraction and desirability,…” Ch.1 (right before ch2) emphasis added. Another occasion of note is in the detailing of what it means to be anti-racist in that “It also means that you participate in social movements and that you vote for candidates who dismantle systemic racism and racial disenfranchisement.” which indicates a fundamental belief in the state function as something that is reformable (through voting). (no need to repeat, but passive/ obfuscated language around the ADL is notable)
How the fuck is Williams going to propose a frame of algorithmic reparation to reform the algorithms after spending the whole first two chapters talking about how the algorithm fundamentally and necessarily instantiates sexual racism? How is it that Williams comes to the conclusion that the solution to the problems with dating apps and algorithms is to create a dedicated minority opposition party within tech companies who will certainly get listened to and taken very seriously by all the noted “white tech bros” as Williams has already described? Even if said veto power is used and employed, how will the following iteration not fall into the same trappings of instantiating the noted forms of racism and heteronormative priority in the project of eugenics? How does one see all these processes of racism within empire and capitalism, note their anoriginal presence in relation to capital and property and identity, describe their ubiquity and super-saturation of culture, and then go on to say that it’s possible to reform these coorporations???
Also notable in the proposed method of redesigning is that this proposed orientation of designing from the margins is specifically one of perceived inclusivity/ safety....
Note that the focus is on the punitive process for when marginalized users have already experienced sexual harassment, racism or transphobia. This approach does not focus on actually creating an environment without these elements, but rather instead concerns itself with perfecting a punitive and carceral function. In this process of elaborating and iterating and improving the punitive methods, the company validates and reforms itself, since without the company and the dating app, how would these users enact this punitive function? Likely not with the police as Williams notes earlier in how marginalized populations are brutalized by the police (as is intended.)
I do get a sense of tension between William’s desire to challenge the algorithm/ algorithmic processes, and the use of language that appears in science and quantifiable research work. Perhaps this is a limitation primarily of the academic press and book format. Part of why Harney and Moten’s writing is so unintelligible at times is that they are actively trying to create a different language than the current language of empire and its project of perfect describablility and interiority in language as one of the realms of dominion.
Williams concluding statement for this chapter essentially advocates for a recreation of the state in centralizing and improving equity in safety for the userbases of the dating app. How does one note all these fundamental forms of racism inherent to the algorithmic processes that dating apps are built around, and then propose that we can make it so people are safe on dating apps and then the fundamental sexual racism that the algorithms are built upon somehow magically disappears? How can Williams call for anything but the abolishment of dating apps and their respective coorporations? I suppose she would lose her job if she didn’t have dating apps to study and write about.
There’s a notable difference in tone between the introduction and conclusion between critique and skepticism, to one of reformist optimism…
Book started off well and then took a nosedive partway through chapter 5. Some things from the notes I took while reading it as this book was my turn to lead the class discussion on the book.
The implicit reader is rather unclear to me. Chapter 3 states that it is for the "white people", but there is never another mention of who the intended audience is. Also according to chapter 3, the other chapters are supposedly "primarily for people of color" yet this is only mentioned in the same frame as the chapter that states itself for a white reader. There is also an apparent shift in the final chapter and conclusion to instead center the corporate diversifier(tm) and hr person with things that are both palatable and actionable on the behalf of the dating app companies.
There are numerous times where even in William’s book that the language of science/ optimization appear. The same goes for language anti-black rhetoric that positions blackness/ darkness with abjection (“This artful myth conceals the darker truth that dating platforms play matchmaker with a faulty set of White supremacist assumptions about attraction and desirability,…” Ch.1 (right before ch2) emphasis added. Another occasion of note is in the detailing of what it means to be anti-racist in that “It also means that you participate in social movements and that you vote for candidates who dismantle systemic racism and racial disenfranchisement.” which indicates a fundamental belief in the state function as something that is reformable (through voting). (no need to repeat, but passive/ obfuscated language around the ADL is notable)
How the fuck is Williams going to propose a frame of algorithmic reparation to reform the algorithms after spending the whole first two chapters talking about how the algorithm fundamentally and necessarily instantiates sexual racism? How is it that Williams comes to the conclusion that the solution to the problems with dating apps and algorithms is to create a dedicated minority opposition party within tech companies who will certainly get listened to and taken very seriously by all the noted “white tech bros” as Williams has already described? Even if said veto power is used and employed, how will the following iteration not fall into the same trappings of instantiating the noted forms of racism and heteronormative priority in the project of eugenics? How does one see all these processes of racism within empire and capitalism, note their anoriginal presence in relation to capital and property and identity, describe their ubiquity and super-saturation of culture, and then go on to say that it’s possible to reform these coorporations???
Also notable in the proposed method of redesigning is that this proposed orientation of designing from the margins is specifically one of perceived inclusivity/ safety....
Note that the focus is on the punitive process for when marginalized users have already experienced sexual harassment, racism or transphobia. This approach does not focus on actually creating an environment without these elements, but rather instead concerns itself with perfecting a punitive and carceral function. In this process of elaborating and iterating and improving the punitive methods, the company validates and reforms itself, since without the company and the dating app, how would these users enact this punitive function? Likely not with the police as Williams notes earlier in how marginalized populations are brutalized by the police (as is intended.)
I do get a sense of tension between William’s desire to challenge the algorithm/ algorithmic processes, and the use of language that appears in science and quantifiable research work. Perhaps this is a limitation primarily of the academic press and book format. Part of why Harney and Moten’s writing is so unintelligible at times is that they are actively trying to create a different language than the current language of empire and its project of perfect describablility and interiority in language as one of the realms of dominion.
Williams concluding statement for this chapter essentially advocates for a recreation of the state in centralizing and improving equity in safety for the userbases of the dating app. How does one note all these fundamental forms of racism inherent to the algorithmic processes that dating apps are built around, and then propose that we can make it so people are safe on dating apps and then the fundamental sexual racism that the algorithms are built upon somehow magically disappears? How can Williams call for anything but the abolishment of dating apps and their respective coorporations? I suppose she would lose her job if she didn’t have dating apps to study and write about.
There’s a notable difference in tone between the introduction and conclusion between critique and skepticism, to one of reformist optimism…
May 14, 2025
An eye opening deep dive into how dating site algorithms willfully discriminate against date seekers who aren’t White. The question of whether attraction or detraction to a person based on the social construct of race or the physical characteristics of a particular ethnic group is indeeed racism is asked. The book continues to probe fetishization and how people are treated differently on dating platforms based on their race or ethnicity. While we all have “types” and “attractions,” which we didn’t willfully choose, the book is an essential read that will imprint in one’s mind and cause a more measured and respectable way of navigating dating platforms.
October 31, 2024
Skipped some sections and skimmed thru the rest. Intetested in the technical aspect of how people actually behave versus what they say, and how this is exploited by dating apps. Unfortunately this book is full of unconstructive, pointed vitriol against the "white men" to be of much use. Essentially this book is just saying that algorithms act as positive feedback on people's racist preferences in dating. I can sympathize with much of what the author's is complaining about but if people are already racist, should dating apps be the sole or even principal culprit? And not surprisingly the suggested solution is again government intervention to regulate apps... Why not just outlaw racism and arrange marriages to meet a certain level of target interracial marriage goal?
January 13, 2025
Angenehmer Schreibstil, gute Beispiele zur Verdeutlichung und ein Thema über das man sich mehr Gedanken machen sollte. Ich habe angefangen mein Verhalten zu reflektieren und werde noch weiter darüber nachdenken.
April 2, 2024
every single one of you needs to read this.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews